Its not up to me, but if some of these folks aren't showing anything(maybe a roll call vote) then maybe its time to move on to someone who would be active. there has to be someone here that would be active

This new guy is the first replacement in I Can't Remember How Long that I didn't find. Maybe that'll make him not suck and we'll have that elusive 10th team who gives a shit

Also, in looking at my team, I don't think I've ever had a roster where so many guys all died together during the same year. Backes, Sharp, Hartnell, Landeskog, Duchene, Mrazek, Fleury...woof. Here's hoping they rebound equally

I was debating a goalie with my last pick, but I also am pretty thin with defensive prospects as well. if I didt have Hart I probably would of gone goaltending with my last pick. don't have a 4th round pick so I don't know who will be available when I pick again.

There are a lot of interesting names this draft, I think. Surprised more goalies haven't gone off the board -- are we the only ones to draft one so far?

Here's to hoping you bastards don't take who I'd like next!

My comment was more that I've ended up with my target every round of the draft so far. Though that is probably because there's less of a consensus outside of the Top 2 than any other year I can recall.

There are a lot of interesting names this draft, I think. Surprised more goalies haven't gone off the board -- are we the only ones to draft one so far?

Here's to hoping you bastards don't take who I'd like next!

My comment was more that I've ended up with my target every round of the draft so far. Though that is probably because there's less of a consensus outside of the Top 2 than any other year I can recall.

I have too, but that's because I don't figure out my targets until I'm on the clock

GoneFullHextall wrote:I was debating a goalie with my last pick, but I also am pretty thin with defensive prospects as well. if I didt have Hart I probably would of gone goaltending with my last pick. don't have a 4th round pick so I don't know who will be available when I pick again.

Want your pick back? I'm slammed with work and need to buy a car this weekend. Just trade me the same pick next year and it's yours if you want.

GoneFullHextall wrote:I was debating a goalie with my last pick, but I also am pretty thin with defensive prospects as well. if I didt have Hart I probably would of gone goaltending with my last pick. don't have a 4th round pick so I don't know who will be available when I pick again.

Want your pick back? I'm slammed with work and need to buy a car this weekend. Just trade me the same pick next year and it's yours if you want.

That cap hit...woof. He basically needs to score as much as 2 very good players to be worth it without getting injured. I still think his frame is a bit small but you need to catch him to hit him I suppose. His asking price is too high in my opinion. I'm no bidding that shit.

The salary definitely makes it tough because of the way it takes away from his value. I've thought about what I could offer and don't know that it makes sense to give it up, given having to make room for 15 mill

vonbonds wrote:This will be my third season and I'll say the goaltending is a much bigger issue than anything else. There aren't enough to go around quite frankly.

I've carried four with varying degrees of success for a while now because of this. Feels like more of an issue with the NHL than our league, though, which sucks because we can't do anything to approach it. We've talked about balancing categories before but I have no idea how to do that. Can't manipulate the counting stats like you can in, say, fantasy baseball.

vonbonds wrote:This will be my third season and I'll say the goaltending is a much bigger issue than anything else. There aren't enough to go around quite frankly.

I've carried four with varying degrees of success for a while now because of this. Feels like more of an issue with the NHL than our league, though, which sucks because we can't do anything to approach it. We've talked about balancing categories before but I have no idea how to do that. Can't manipulate the counting stats like you can in, say, fantasy baseball.

I was going to say what we can add is arbitrary or meh. Instead, I looked up what other categories we could add because Fantrax definitely offers more and I would like more balance. Below, I've listed what seem to be most interesting and compelling.

Side note, holy butt, Nucks has five starting goalies. I thought I had a lot. I'd say go talk to him, vb, but I assume you already have. He apparently wants the moon for Darling.

Anyway. About the stats above, these might be my preferences, in no particular order:

-one of Corsi/Fenwick to show strength of puck possession-Shootout goals because it sucks that we get zero benefit from a guy helping to win a game -Shot% because maybe it balances shots...say a team puts up 200 shots every week but only shoots 4%, they win with a category with a flimsy conversion rate-Truculence because it's silly, fun, and possibly more functional than strictly PIM-Shutouts because it could very easily provide balance to goalie shutouts, since simply having one wouldn't give a team such a high probability of winning the category for the week-Faceoff% because it puts a higher value on another particular moment/position in a game, like we've done with goalies

Let me know what you guys think here. If there's any traction with a category or two, I'll suggest it on the league board and we can argue for it there. And GFH, how many teams is your other keeper where you're limited in how many starters you can have, and what defines a starter?

He wants a really nice piece for Darling. We've tabled it for a bit as I'm not giving him Puljujärvi who'll easily leach off of either McJesus or Drasaitl for years to come for an unproven goalie on a classic middling team.

vonbonds wrote:He wants a really nice piece for Darling. We've tabled it for a bit as I'm not giving him Puljujärvi who'll easily leach off of either McJesus or Drasaitl for years to come for an unproven goalie on a classic middling team.

Bow Tie wrote:Side note, holy butt, Nucks has five starting goalies. I thought I had a lot. I'd say go talk to him, vb, but I assume you already have. He apparently wants the moon for Darling.

Anyway. About the stats above, these might be my preferences, in no particular order:

-one of Corsi/Fenwick to show strength of puck possession-Shootout goals because it sucks that we get zero benefit from a guy helping to win a game -Shot% because maybe it balances shots...say a team puts up 200 shots every week but only shoots 4%, they win with a category with a flimsy conversion rate-Truculence because it's silly, fun, and possibly more functional than strictly PIM-Shutouts because it could very easily provide balance to goalie shutouts, since simply having one wouldn't give a team such a high probability of winning the category for the week-Faceoff% because it puts a higher value on another particular moment/position in a game, like we've done with goalies

Let me know what you guys think here. If there's any traction with a category or two, I'll suggest it on the league board and we can argue for it there. And GFH, how many teams is your other keeper where you're limited in how many starters you can have, and what defines a starter?

I would add shutouts, but not everyone is a fan of that catnot sure how I feel about a stat with hits in in since that is a stat that is not kept evenly in every arena.I would be good with faceoff percentage. shootout goals is interesting even tho that might be a stat that ties many weeks.those are the 4 off that list that I would have some sort of interest in.

14 teams. but we do have some inactive GMs. you can carry 3 starters. Any goalie that was named the teams starter at the start of the season. goalies on IR obviously do not count to that limit either.

How are skater shutouts calculated? Every skater on a team who shuts out the other team gets one? Like, if Nashville shuts the other team out, I get one for Ellis, one for Arvidsson, and one for Aberg?

I LOVE truculence. As a replacement for PIM more than as an addition. Counting hits and blocks will make a lot of traditionally useless defesemen a lot more valuable.

Corsi/Fenwick is interesting. Is it measured as a percentage or a raw value like +/-?

As far as I can tell, yes, every player on a team would be rewarded with a shutout if the goalie earned one.

I know hits are recorded differently everywhere, but if we look at its inclusion in truculence as a way to measure that some guys simply hit more than others, I don't think it's terrible. Adds a bit more nuance, especially with what seems like less and less guys each year who put up big PIMs.

I'm unsure how Coris/Fenwick are represented. Fantrax makes it really difficult to find that kind of information, because, well, Fantrax. I assume it would be calculated by the average number for each skater.

I think shootout goals is really compelling. A bunch of guys get chances and if it can decide an NHL game then I don't see why it can't contribute to balancing our categories.

I think faceoff% would be okay, too.

I'm entirely uncertain of the odds of limiting starters for each team would pass. But that's intriguing, too.

pretty much everyone adheres to the rule in my other league. I don't remember it being an issue. I kept 4 goalies 2 starters and those teams backups because my starters never stayed healthy. now all 4 of my goalies are scattered around the league due to FA and expansion. both leagues I am in goaltending is highly valued, my goaltending did me in, in my other league in the playoffs but pretty much won me this league.

None of y'all need a d-man, do you? I have one too many for my salary situation. Would be open to moving one of Weber, Justin Schultz, Ghost, Krug, or Keith, though some are obviously harder to get than others.